Facebook has taken down the post of journalist Ed Lingao Anti-Marcos sentiment

ANTI-MARCOS SENTIMENT against the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos.Facebook has taken down a television anchor's post critical of plans to allow the burial of dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (Heroes' Cemetery), supposedly because the post violated the social network's community standards.Lingao said that it was the second time his post was removed.For the third time on Wednesday, he posted the same post, which Facebook earlier deleted.

In his post, Lingao questioned the decision of President-elect Rodrigo Duterte to allow the burial of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani.

Duterte has said that burying Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani would allow the healing of the nation, which he said has been long divided by the said issue.

But Lingao justified why the former president should not be buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, citing his human rights abuses and ill-gotten wealth.

“YOU WANT him buried at the Libingan ng mga Bayani? Very well, but on the headstone, put the name William Saunders. That is the name he used to open his first Swiss account, that later mushroomed to a dozen,” his post read.

During the Marcos regime, he said tens of thousands were victims of human rights abuses and at least $10 billion were been stolen by the Marcos family.

“So really, who should move on and allow healing? The thousands who were victimized? The prosecutors still looking for another five billion dollars in hidden wealth? Or a family that chooses to ignore all this by funding a macabre quarter-century spectacle at the family mausoleum in Ilocos because it simply insists that the patriarch be buried a hero. Who is really holding the nation hostage here? And so, really, who should move on?” Lingao said.

He said the issue of burying Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani is a moral issue.

“The rules governing the use of the Libingan are just executive in nature, and the commander-in-chief can of course order that the rules be changed. It is not a legal question at all, but a moral one,” he said.

After his third post, Lingao said he was barred from posting any status for one day.

Lingao said Facebook’s action of taking down his post was “ridiculous.”

“It was really ridiculous. Anyone who has read the post can tell you that it was quite subdued. I think the points were also reasonably argued,” he said.

“I find it alarming that Facebook’s community standards do not appear to be well thought out,” he added.

He said he was wondering whether Facebook “makes decisions like these based only on the number of complaints, in which case the group with the most number of trolls can control FB content.”

Aside from Lingao, other journalists’ Facebook accounts were suspended after sharing his post.

Lingao also said that a follow-up post on his account, where he described the comments he received on the original post, was also deleted.

On Wednesday afternoon, Lingao reposted the first post. But he has since been blocked from making further posts on his Facebook account for at least 24 hours.

Meanwhile, journalist Inday Espina-Varona said that her brother, Nonoy Espina, and other colleagues from media also found their Facebook accounts suspended after sharing Lingao's post. Link Post

Sought for comment, Facebook said it is now looking into the matter.

“We are looking into this now,” said Ken Teh, Facebook media partnerships in the Asia Pacific region.

According to Facebook's community standards, the following kinds of posts are not allowed on the social network, and may be removed by site administrators: hate speech, violence and graphic content, nudity, bullying and harassment, direct threats, attacks on public figures, criminal activity, sexual violence and exploitation, dangerous organizations, regulated goods, and self-injury, among others.

Content reviewers look over posts reported for violating community standards.

The site, however, said that the number of reports on a particular post "does not impact whether something will be removed," and added that it does not remove content "simply because it has been reported a number of times."

If you remember U.S. Internet giants Facebook Inc., Twitter Inc., Google and Microsoft Corp. pledged to tackle online hate speech in less than 24 hours as part of a joint commitment with the European Union to combat the use of social media by terrorists. (Tuesday Post May 31)